Cane v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
January 1986
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Hart v. State
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) To insure the public safety through: (A) The deterrent influence of the penalties provided: (B) The rehabilitation of those convicted, and; (C) Punishment as may be necessary to prevent likely reoccurrence of criminal behavior. (2) To give fair warning of what is prohibited and of the consequences of violation. (3) To prescribe penalties that are proportionate to the seriousness of the offense and that permits recognition of differences in rehabilitation possibilities among individual offenders.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cane v. State
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.